Key Issues Forum on Regionalism
Posted on Thursday, November 13 2008 by Heather Brandon
Amy Bergquist of the Greater Hartford Real Estate Blog wrote a post today about a panel discussion on regionalism that took place early this morning at the University of Hartford. The event was titled, “Stay Retro or Go Metro?” The panel was set to address the question, what are the pros and cons of more regional cooperation and of acting more like a metro region?
The panel was part of an ongoing series sponsored by the Hartford Courant called the Key Issues Forum, and was also co-sponsored by the university’s Center for Integrated Design. Panelists were Mary Glassman, first selectwoman of Simsbury; Mark Muro, policy director of the Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution; State Rep. Brendan Sharkey of Hamden; and Lyle Wray, executive director of the Capitol Region Council of Governments. Bergquist noted that the audience of just over 100 was largely packed with older white men:
I wasn’t sure if the audience was a reflection of the demographic that finds this topic of interest, or that the time of day had more to do with it. Would an event held in the evening draw the same crowd? We need younger people caring about this too!
We also need more bloggers covering events like this of regional interest to get the word out, as Bergquist has helpfully done. Who will take the lead on regionalism?
Brendan Mahoney http://beatbikeblog.blogspot.com
November 13th, 2008 at 2:10 pmI had wanted to go, but it was too early.
It should have been an evening event.
Heather Brandon http://urbancompass.net
November 13th, 2008 at 2:15 pmAgreed. I also would have liked to go, if I had known about it in the first place. If these issues are so key, maybe they could have a web site.
David B. Panagore
November 13th, 2008 at 8:53 pmI attended and it was a very good panel with a variety of perspectives but together the ideas were mutually supporting. More programs like this are needed.
Hartford Watcher
November 14th, 2008 at 8:44 amThe benefits of regionalism have been overlooked in the State of Connecticut. The Land of Steady Habits has always been quite happy with it’s fiefdoms called towns. And the lack of a regional approach has left the State with withering cities, collapsing under their own weight and woeful lack of resources.
Although I bristle a bit at the constant cry from Amy B. and others that the “young” people are the answer, I do agree that we need to bring together a broad representation of the population to listen to understand the issues. There are resurrection ideas here for our cities.
Heather Brandon http://urbancompass.net
November 14th, 2008 at 10:05 amWhat are some organizations (or individuals) that might be in a position to do this bringing-together of a broad representation, and host more panel discussions or brainstorm sessions?
In my recent research on regional transportation policy, I was very taken by the work of the governor’s commission examining ConnDOT reform. Personally I would begin there, in part, working to implement the commission’s recommendations as swiftly as possible. Transportation infrastructure is a major piece of our regional challenges. But only a piece!
What else can be done? What can regular people do on the ground, folks who don’t hold political office?
Maybe I’ll do a series of interviews focusing on regionalism. Whom should I interview?
Peter G http://www.twogoodhands.wordpress.com
November 14th, 2008 at 10:07 amIt’s interesting that observers commented on the attendees being mostly older white men. When I saw the line-up of speakers the first thing that occurred to me was: if we’re going to talk about regionalism, why is there not a single mayor or city councilperson from a major CT city on the panel?
I would say that regionalism has not been overlooked in Connecticut. It has been deliberately avoided - like the plague. And the reasons are not difficult to see. So long as times are relatively good, Connecticut provincialism and the rule of the small towns guarantees that the Big Problems - lack of adequate housing, unemployment, lack of job training opportunities for anything except MacDonalds, locating treatment and residential programs for mentally ill people, young people under DCF care, ex-offenders, people with disabilities, etc. all fall on the cities and a few of their surrounding suburbs.
Meanwhile, other small towns in the region get the “benefit” of keeping their communities - and especially their schools - mostly white, tightly controlling their local development, and if necessary, shipping in the urban poor in sufficient numbers to service their needs while ensuring that they all go back home when they’re done.
At the same time, I notice that whenever real life, intractable problems like crime and poverty surface as major issues, the subourboisie feel quite privileged about telling Hartford and New Haven and Bridgeport what they need to do to fix their problems. Not surprisingly, these often take the tone of what Dickens referred to as “the insect on the leaf pronouncing on the too much life among his hungry brothers in the dust.”
So I find it interesting that there is beginning to be some discussion about regionalism that is not being initiated by the cities themselves - and in that respect perhaps the UHa forum was a good thing. But I get the sense that their perspective on regionalism is more about pooling purchasing power and resources for the benefit of the small towns, not about throwing open the doors of their schools or developing low income housing in their communities for the benefit of the region.
AmyBergquist http://www.GreaterHartfordRealEstateBlog.com
November 14th, 2008 at 1:01 pmA couple of comments. I thought it was odd that the Courant didn’t run a follow up piece in today’s issue.
Hartford Watcher- I’m sorry you are bothered by “constant cry” about young professionals. That’s my demographic, so I easily identify with this group of people. I honestly don’t care who gets involved with supporting regionalism and trying to make the Greater Hartford area better, I just want to see people engaged in improving the community.
Hartford Watcher
November 15th, 2008 at 10:37 amTo Amy’s comment: The Courant does not have the resources any longer to cover this type of story. I do know that the NY Times is investing significant resources to expand their local coverage in our market. If they pull that off, the area will have a GREAT newspaper again.
I understand that you are part of the “demographic”. But it’s not the largest one. That means that whatever needs to be done requires intergenerational commitment. Unfortunately in our City we tend not to employ this approach, opting for the Java headlines about issues that often hardly matter.
Tom Christoffel http://regional-communities.blogspot.com/
November 22nd, 2008 at 11:28 pmGoogle’s Blog alert sent me to this post because of the term “regionalism.” This article should be useful to the subscribers of Regional Community Development News, so I will include a link to it in the November 26 issue. It can be found at http://regional-communities.blogspot.com/ Please visit, check the tools and consider a link. Tom
Heather Brandon http://urbancompass.net
December 1st, 2008 at 10:01 amRebecca Townsend of Pioneer Valley Advocates for Commuter Rail tried and failed to post a comment here, so, on her behalf:
Gee, this was advertised at UHa on Nov. 10. The first I have heard of this effort was on this blog. Seems like it would have been interesting.
Perhaps part of the impulse motivating the term ‘retro’ is the recognition that small towns need cities, and that old-fashioned notions about local control hinder best practices in municipal government? As for Peter G’s comments–by having a selectwoman on the panel the forum demonstrates that it’s the small towns that perceive themselves as having something to lose with regionalism….when in fact we may be at a turning point such that towns are seeing regionalism as part of the solution. If regionalism in the way the forum panelists may have discussed it was starting off w/ purchasing power, etc….at least that’s a start. Small towns, like big cities, have ‘face needs’–for autonomy/free will/respect. The forum seems to be a good start for future issues (like housing) to gain a foothold.
Sen. Dodd spoke of Enfield and MA towns needing to see rail as a regional issue….perhaps that’s another area to examine?
other areas to examine: farming organizations, climate control activists, planning boards, higher education, arts & culture connections. There are several places where regionalism can flourish–I guess it begins with a little bit of trust.